UNH logo: Why all the anger?

If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?

— Shylock in William's Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice

We would argue the adverse reaction to a logo redesign for the University of New Hampshire has less to do with the questionable graphics and more to do with an aggrieved audience and a less than cogent video presentation.

Last week, university officials invited alumni and others to log on to a video presentation which tried to explain the whys and wherefores of the UNH logo project. Since then it would be kind to say public reaction has been less than favorable. Rabid might better describe the anger of some.

In short, UNH hired the New York design firm Chermayeff & Geismar & Haviv to do the work at a cost of approximately $100,000.

On paper the idea has merit, as was awkwardly explained in the video but better explained later by a UNH spokesperson:

“UNH needed a logo that represents its presence outside of Durham as well as establishes it in a national and international market for both students and private dollars. Chermayeff has created identities for many institutions of higher education, including New York University, Middlebury College and Cornell University.”

Also explained off camera was that the project had gone out to bid, but Chermayeff was “the only firm that committed to the full project.”

We doubt even if the logo project had been better explained it would have been greeted in an “All hail, Caesar” fashion.

First off, the cost of the project is close to the cost of an in-state, four-year college education. In response to questioning, UNH implied no one should be aggrieved because the money was privately raised — an excuse that wouldn't last seconds in a critical thinking class at UNH.

Then there is the morale factor.

UNH has suffered in recent years due to a number of factors. The most notable was a reduction in state funding of $47 million annually. But financial trouble was brewing before, as was frequently noted by UNH President Mark Huddleston during contract negotiations with the professors' union. All this has meant plenty of belt tightening among faculty and staff who now resent what they see as a waste of some $100,000 on a set of logo designs that don't knock the socks off anyone.

We would suggest the issue of low morale extends to the alumni community which also sees the expense of the logo project as an affront given the debt many of them are now paying off.

None of what we write here is to suggest that UNH forego reworking its logo. In the modern era of corporate sponsorship, image is everything as is branding. And lord only knows, given the lack of state support for this state university, UNH needs every leg up it can get.

But UNH needs to start with the basics. It needs to build its image first from within. That means with faculty, staff and alumni.

As for the three logos, we expect if UNH officials move forward one of these will eventually grow on those who now object. But if UNH officials are smart, they will hit the pause button and invite new logo ideas from faculty, staff, alumni and anyone who thinks they can do better.